MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103789773 · doi:10.7202/011177ar

Clamence et l’interlocuteur : pragmatique de la manipulation et de l’identification dans le discours de La Chute de Camus

2005· article· fr· W2103789773 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gilles Visy

Bibliographic record

VenueProtée · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le double jeu de Clamence, à la fois juge et pénitent dans l’interface de l’être et du paraître, semble être le ressort de l’identification du lecteur à l’interlocuteur. Clamence s’adresse à une sorte de grand énonciataire : l’humanité en général et par ricochet le lecteur. La pragmatique du discours de La Chute se construit sur quatre actants : énonciateur-locuteur / interlocuteur-énonciataire. Ces deux entités n’en font qu’une seule et, par contrecoup, l’énonciateur sera assimilé à l’énonciataire par le biais du lecteur. Dans La Chute , émerge en fait tout un jeu de miroirs discursifs dans lequel, d’une part, Clamence élabore son mea culpa et, d’autre part, juge l’humanité comme s’il était une sorte de démiurge divin. Le réquisitoire s’achève sur une note pessimiste qui ne fait que traduire une farce noire dont le procès discursif n’est que pure ironie.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtéeSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207